a study of the relationship between defects of
TRANSCRIPT
Central Washington University Central Washington University
ScholarWorks@CWU ScholarWorks@CWU
All Master's Theses Master's Theses
1957
A Study of the Relationship Between Defects of articulation in A Study of the Relationship Between Defects of articulation in
Speech and Emotional Stability of children in the Primary Grades Speech and Emotional Stability of children in the Primary Grades
Frances P. Oechsner Central Washington University
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.cwu.edu/etd
Part of the Educational Methods Commons, and the Social and Philosophical Foundations of
Education Commons
Recommended Citation Recommended Citation Oechsner, Frances P., "A Study of the Relationship Between Defects of articulation in Speech and Emotional Stability of children in the Primary Grades" (1957). All Master's Theses. 176. https://digitalcommons.cwu.edu/etd/176
This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Master's Theses at ScholarWorks@CWU. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@CWU. For more information, please contact [email protected].
A STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIP
BETWEEN DEFECTS OF ARTICULATION IN SPEECH AND
EMOTIONAL STABILITY OF CHILDREN IN THE PRIMARY GRADES
A Thesis
Presented to
the Graduate Faculty
Central Washington College of Education
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Master of Education
by
Frances P. Oechsner
August 1957
LD 5771.3
q:»CIA.L -:.o\..u.c;noN ~
88457
APPROVED FOR THE GRADUATE FACULTY _________________________________ Milo L. Smith, COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN _________________________________ Keith Rinehart _________________________________ Eldon E. Jacobsen
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
To the following people the writer wishes to express
appreciation: Mr. Milo L. Smith, Assistant Professor of
Speech, for valuable assistance and criticism, and under
whose direction this study was completed; Dr. Keith
Rinehart, Assistant Professor of English, for helpful
suggestions and advice; and especially for the contri
butions of Dr. E. E. Jacobsen, Associate Professor of
Psychology.
This thesis is dedicated to F. and J., who, on the
basis of random sampling, are highly improbable.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER
I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . II. CRITICAL REVIEW OF PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS •
Emotional Instability as a Causal Factor
in Articulatory Defects. . . . . . . Reviews of Studies on the Relationship
Between Articulatory Defects and
. .
PAGE
1
3
4
Emotional Instability. • • • • • • • 9
III.
Summary and Discussion • • • • . . . . . . STANDARDS FOR EVALUATION • • •
The Standardized Personality Test •••
The Speech Attitude Scale. • • ••
The Subjects . . . . . . . . . . . The speech defective group • . . . . . . The controls . . . . . . .
Administration of Tests. . . . . . . . Limitations •• . . . . . . . . .
IV. EVALUATIONS AND RESULTS. . . . . . .
16
19
19
22
25
25
28
36
38
40
The California Test of Personality • • 41
. . . . . . Personal adjustment.
Social adjustment ••• . . . . . . . Total adjustment • . . . . . . . . . . .
The Speech Attitude Scale •• • • • 0 •
44
44
45
46
CHAPTER
V. SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . • • . . . . . BIBLIOGRAPHY ••• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX A: Speech Attitude Scale •• . . . . . . . . APPENDIX B: Sample Data Used in Computing a
v
PAGE
55
58
63
Stability Coefficient for the Speech
Attitude Scale • • • . • . • • • • • • 65
APPENDIX C: Matching Criteria for Parallel-Group
Technique. • • • • • • • • . • • . . . APPENDIX D: Sample Data for Computing a t-Test of
Significance Between Matched Pairs of
Children with Articulation Disorders
and Speech Normal Children on the
Speech Attitude Scale ••••••• • •
APPENDIX E: Comparative Raw Scores of Children with
Articulation Disorders and Speech
Normal Children for California Test
of Personality--Primary Series (AA)--
All Sections • • . . . . . . . APPENDIX F: Comparative Scores of Children with
Articulation Disorders and Speech
Normal Children for the Speech
. .
Attitude Scale •••.•..• . . . .
66
68
69
70
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE PAGE
1. A Comparison of the Grade Levels of the Speech
Defective Group and the Control Group . . . 31
2. A Comparison of the Speech Defective Group and
the Control Group According to Sex and Grade 32
3. A Comparison of Available Intelligence 'qi,uotient
Scores on the Speech Defective Group and
Control Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. A Comparison of Classroom Teachers 1 and
~riter's Estimates of the Severity of the
33
Speech Defect • • . • • • • . . • . 34
5. A Comparison of Mean Scores on California Test
of Personality (Primary Series) for Children
with Articulation Disorders and Speech
Normal Children • • • . • • • •
6. A Comparison of Mean .Scores on Speech Attitude
Scale for Children with Articulation Disorders
43
and Speech Normal Children. • . • • • • 48
7. A Comparison of the Two Groups on the Number
of "Poor Speech Attitudesn Answers on the
Speech Attitude Scale • . . • • • . • • • • 50
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
This study is concerned with the relationship
between defects of articulation in speech and emotional
instability in elementary school children.
The question of the extent to which these two
factors are associated is of considerable interest to
those working in the field of speech rehabilitation for
two reasons: First, many writers have mentioned emotional
instability as a frequent cause of articulatory defects,
yet little has been reported in the way of objective data
to substantiate such assertions. Secondly, if emotional
instability is commonly found in speech defective elemen
tary school children, it may well be that such emotional
instability is the result of, if not the cause of, the
speech defect. In either case, a clearer understanding
of the emotional status of children with articulatory
defects is desirable and it is hoped this study may make
some contribution to this end.
The general procedure followed throughout the study
involved a comparison of children having articulatory
defects with speech normal children for personal and
social adjustment. The parallel-group technique was
2
used, having the speech defect as a variable, with personal
and social adjustment as the factors to be measured. In
addition, an attempt was made to evaluate the attitudes
toward speech in both the experimental and control groups.
The specific questions to which answers were sought
may be stated as follows:
1. Is there a marked difference in emotional stability in a group of children having articulatory defects as compared with a control group of the same general intelligence, sex, and other ancillary factors?
2. Is there a marked difference in attitude toward speech in a group of speech defective children compared with a control group?
CHAPTER II
CRITICAL REVIEW OF PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS
Before proceeding to a discussion of the related
historical data and the literature involved, it will be
necessary to define articulatory defects and to explore
the incidence of such defects. Articulatory disorders
consist primarily of abnormal substitution, distortion,
insertion, or omission of speech sounds. Vivian I. Roe,
in studying the effect of maturation upon defective arti-
culation in the elementary grades, found sound substitu-
tions to be the most frequently observed error among
articulatory speech defectives. 1 Articulation cases
present a wide variety of symptoms and may range in
severity from an intermittent lisp to a multitude of
defective consonants. Where there is no demonstrable
structural or constitutional deficiency, the defect is
said to be functional. James F. Bender and Victor M.
Kleinfield found that nearly 90 per cent of the speech
handicaps encountered in the educational system were of
1vi vi an I. Roe, r'The Effect of Maturation Upon Defective Articulation in the Elementary Grades, 11
(unpublished Master's thesis, The University of Indiana, Bloomington, 1940), p. 46.
the bad habit or functional type. 2
Speech therapists who have worked with children in
elementary schools agree that articulatory defects are
the most prevalent type of speech defect. The rehabili-
tation program requires considerable effort, and also
absorbs a large share of the funds being appropriated
for special education. This opinion is substantiated by
the report of the White House Conference on Child Health
and Protection of 1930, which estimated that articulatory
defects comprise approximately 70 per cent of all speech
defects of elementary school children.3
A review of the literature pertinent to this study
involves (a) a discussion of the opinions of various
writers as to the role of emotional instability as a
causal factor in articulatory defects and (b) a review
of other studies concerned with the relationship between
articulatory defects and emotional instability.
A. Emotional Instability as a Causal Factor in
Articulatory Defects
4
2James F. Bender and Victor M. Kleinfield, Principles and Practices of Speech Correction (New York: Pitman Publishing Company, 1938), p. 233.
3White House Conference on Child Health and Protection, Special Education, Report of Committee on Special Classes (New York: D. Appleton-Century Company, 1932), pp. 107-109.
5
The commonly mentioned causes of articulatory defects,
according to Charles Van Riper, a representative authority
in the field of speech correction, may be discussed in.
terms of organic abnormalities, motor incoordinations,
developmental retardation, perceptual deficiencies, and
emotional conflicts. 4
As illustrated by the quotations that follow, the
term "emotional conflicts 11 is identified in literature by
several terms: emotional instability, personality
inadequacy, social maladjustment, or "chance conditioning";
but for the purposes of this paper the popular term,
"emotional instability, 11 will be used.
The general acceptance of emotional instability as
a possible major syndrome in articulatory defects is
evident in the following excerpts from recognized author-
ities in the field of speech rehabilitation.
Ollie L. Backus, using the term 11 chance conditioning,"
discusses emotional instability as a cause of articulatory
disorders:
It may well be a 'catch-all' for cases whose cause we do not know or do not take the trouble to find. However, there are at the present time, at least, many so-called minor articulatory defects which can be explained only by the term 'chance conditioning.' Why,
4Charles Van Riper, Speech Correction, Principles and Methods (New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1947), p:-127.
for instance, should a child whose speech is otherwise normal and whose anatomical, psychological, and neurological mechanism is apparently sound, have a lateral lisp on ~ and ( ? It seems necessary to predicate the factor of 'CKance cond~tioning as one the causes of articulatory defects.
Van Riper states that
6
Emotional conflicts may • • • serve as predisposing, precipitating, and maintaining causes of speech disorders. The literature is thronged with case studies showing the influence of personality and behavior problems in producing speech disorders •••• Some of our most difficult articulation cases are those in which the child has failed to acquire6 adult pronunciation because of emotional conflicts.
Mildred F. Berry and Jon Eisenson, using the term
Eersonality, emphasize the same general concept:
The role which the development of personality plays in speech is well known. Speech is so intimately connected with our personalities that any major deviation from the norm in pers~nal adjustment is certain to be reflected in speech.
Bender and Kleinfield recognize the influence of
emotional instability on speech, for they consistently
emphasize that speech correction should include a consider-
ation of such matters as mental hygiene and personality
50llie L. Backus, Speech Classroom Teacher (New York: pany, 1953), pp. 136-137.
Education, A Guide for the Longmans, Green, and Com:-
6v R . . t 31 d 13 -an iper, 912.· ci_., pp. an j.
7Mildred F. Berry and Jon Eisenson, The Defective in Speech (New York: .B'. S. CroJ_ ts and Company, 1955), p. 75.
7
development. "Speech re-education includes self-analytical
treatment to find immediately underlying mental causes of
personality maladjustment and speech failure. 118 The authors,
furthermore, state that five to seven per cent of students
in the public schools are neurotic and that this percentage
is often exceeded in a group of speech handicapped
children.
A neurotic person is one who lacks emotional stability, is too easily aroused, whose behavior is controlled with difficulty; for example, compensation tendencies, exaggerated egotism, introversion, ambiversion, extroversion, worry, anxiety, vexati§n, negativism, and mental conflicts are evident.
Robert West, Lou Kennedy and Anna Carr feel there
are many speech disorders, the explanation for which lies
in the realm of abnormal psychology, psychopathology, or
psychiatry. These disorders, which may be vocal, articu-
latory, or linguistic, are almost always rooted in child-
hood experiences and attitudes. Anything that causes
the child to feel insecure in his social environment might
establish emotional habits that could easily persist into
adulthood. Some of the most common conditions are physical
inferiority, peculiarities of appearance, peculiarities
of dress and apparel, peculiar habits, mannerisms and
8Bender and Kleinfield, 212.• cit., p. 88.
9Ibid., p. 212.
8
afflictions, inferior social standing, unusual home disci-
pline, and inferiority feelings. They believe the unique
nature of speech defects, both in special type and parti
cular incidence, demands the study of the individua1. 10
Therefore, the speech defective may need as much attention
as the speech defect.
Backus believes speech is a gauge -- it is a test
of the psychic adjustment of the individual to the condi-
tions under which he must live. She stresses the fact
that
••• speech disorders and social maladjustment may have a common cause • . • social maladjustments may cause defective speech. Certain patterns of speech result rather habitually from social maladjustment. Yet, no causal relationship may exist between speech defects and social maladjstment. It is quite possible the speech defect and the personality problem seem to be present in an individ~~l and yet have no causal relationship whatsoever.
To the above few excerpts could be added many more,
for it is generally conceived that a child learns speech
as a part of the whole process of organizing his behavior
and learning to adjust to his environment. It is obvious,
lORobert West, Lou Kennedy, and .Anna Carr, Rehabilitation of Speech, ~ Textbook of Diagnostic and Corrective Procedures (New York: Harper and Brothers; Revised Edition, 1947), pp. 38-52.
11Backus, Q£· cit., pp. 115-119.
9
then, that a study of the various speech defects and
disorders in children will perforce carry one into the
field of personality study and behavior problems.
Logical and reasonable as these opinions of author-
ities seem to be in suggesting emotional instability as a
causal factor in articulatory defects, the next step
becomes one of determining whether this causal factor is
supported by any experimental evidence. To further
establish a background, the discussion will continue to
research which has been completed, to determine whether
the child with articulatory disorders differs significantly
in emotional stability from the normal child.
B. Reviews of Studies on the Relationship Between
Articulatory Defects and Emotional Instability
Although a number of studies have been made on
certain aspects of the relationship between articulatory
defects and emotional instability, Berry and Eisenson in
1955 suggested the need for further research:
In order to properly determine the influence of speech defects on the personality of an individual, we should deal with persons whose defects are purely and wholly functional in origin, defects which as far as we can discern have no organic basis and no organic correlates.
Unfortunately, except in the case of stutterers, there is little experimental evidence of any sort that touches on the possible influence of speech
10
defects on personality and the experimental evidence which is available has not taken cognizance of the possible concomitants we have mentioned. For the most part, mature persons, usually students at college level, have been the subjects of experimentation. Such subjects constitute a highly selected group and should not be considered represe~~ative of the speech defective population as a whole.
Among the earlier studies mentioned by Berry and
Eisenson of the personality traits of speech defectives
were those of Sara Stinchfield, 1 3 A. M. Templin, 14 w. E.
Moore, 1 5 and Jon Eisenson. 16
Stinchfield, in 1930, administered the Thurstone
Personality Schedule to forty-six speech defective fresh-
men at Mount Holyoke College. Sixty per cent of the
questions considered most significant by Thurstone as being
indicative of maladjustment appeared in the positive list
of high frequency answers.
In 1946, to substantiate the earlier findings,
12Berry and Eisenson, .£:£• cit., p. 65.
13sara M. Stinchfield, Speech Disorders (New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1953), pp. 207-221.
14M. A. Templin, 11 A Study of Aggressiveness in Normal and Defective Speaking College Students," Journal of Speech Disorders, March, 1948, pp. 43-49.
l5w. E. Moore, "Personality Traits and Voice Quality Deficiencies," Journal of Speech Disorders, March, 1949, pp. 33-36.
16Berry and Eisenson, .£:£· cit., pp. 65-69.
11
Stinchfield arranged a Trait Inventory with forty-six
desirable and undesirable traits to give to three groups
of students at Mount Holyoke College. One group of
students needed speech correction work, a second group
of students were classed as having superior speech, and
a large group of students with average speech ability.
The group needing correction checked more negative traits
than the other two on questions regarding disposition,
tact, courtesy, control of behavior, and undue sensitivity.
The speech correction group indicated by their scores they
considered themselves below the average and superior
group in such traits as evenness of disposition, courtesy,
quietness, good memory, behavior control, and degree of
sensitivity. In addition, the speech correction group
considered themselves more aggressive than the other
students. 17
M. A. Templin used the revised Moore-Gilliland test
to measure the single trait of aggressiveness with seventy-
one students enrolled in the Speech Clinic at Purdue
University and forty-nine normal subjects. 18 Her results,
while not statistically significant because of the small
17stinchfield,
18Templin, .212.·
.212.· cit., pp. 65-69.
cit., pp. 43-49.
12
differences reported and too few subjects, tend to show
that normal speakers were more aggressive than the speech
defectives; and of the speech defectives, that the
stutterers were more aggressive than the students with
articulatory defects.
W. E. Moore, in 1948, administered the Bernreuter
Personality Inventory to 119 students at Colorado State
College and Kent State University who had voice quality
deficiencies to find that students with breathy voices
were likely to be high in neurotic tendencies and intro
version, while those with a whine rated as probably
emotionally unstable and lower in dominance. The students
with harsh metallic voices were inclined to be dominant
and more emotionally stable. 19
In 1940, Eisenson sought to find whether the traits
of college speech defectives, as measured by a standard
ized personality inventory, differ from those of normal
college students and whether the personality traits of
the speech defectives attending a clinic differ from those
of the classroom speech defectives. Using again the
Bernreuter Personality ~nventory, he found (1) the clinic
group slightly more neurotic than the class speech defective
l9Moore, QI?.• cit., pp. 33-36.
13
group and the normal group, (2) both defective groups
were less self-sufficient than the control group, (3) the
clinic group was more introverted than the class speech
defectives and both were more introverted than the normal
group, (4) the normal speakers were more dominant than
either the clinic or the class speech defectives, and (5)
the clinic group was less self-confident than the class
speech defectives and the latter group more self-conscious
(less self-confident) than the control group. There were,
however, no appreciable differences in sociability among
the groups considered. 20
From the above studies, the following results
indicate: (1) the personality traits of college speech
defectives are different, slightly and undesirably so, from
college students with normal speech, (2) the differences
in personality traits which appear between mild speech
defectives and normal speakers are more serious when clinic
students are compared with normal speakers. Thus, there
seems to be a positive relationship between the serious-
ness of the speech deficiency and the tendency for the
defective individual to possess undesirable personality
traits. There seems to be a tendency for speech defective
20Berry and Eisenson, .2.:2· cit., pp. 67-68.
individuals of college age to present a personality
picture which includes traits considered to be socially
undesirable.
14
But, in seeking to ascertain whether the speech
defective child in the primary grades of elementary school
differs significantly from the normal child in personality
traits or emotional stability, one finds the research
limited.
Numerous discussions of the relationship between
speech disorders and personality defects in children are
to be found in periodicals and recent texts. The factors
of age, emotion, environment, thinking difficulties, anti
social trends, economic status, parental coddling, and
parental anxiety have all been mentioned as related to
the retardation of speech. But the majority of these
opinions, as found in the periodicals and texts, lack the
support of reported empirical research and statistical
data.
~uintilla Anders, in 1945, made a study of the
personal and social adjustment of children with functional
articulatory defects. Using fifty-three children ranging
from six to twelve years of age, she obtained a speech
score, a mental age score, a teacher's rating, and a
personality score with the California Test of Personality.
15
The subjects were found to be above average in adjustment, 21
the median of test scores being 75 and the mean 65.64.
Insofar as her study is concerned, speech correction for
functional articulatory defects cannot be justified on the
basis of preventing inevitable personality maladjustments.
Sister Mary Rose Powers used the same test to
compare a group of one hundred junior high school stutterers
matched according to sex, age, and intelligence with one
hundred junior high school non-stutterers. In self-
adjustment, no significant difference in the two groups
was found; in social adjustment a tendency toward a
significant difference was noted; and in total adjustment
no difference was indicated. She concluded that both
groups may be considered equally well adjusted. 22
Kenneth S. Woods, in 1946, sought to determine
whether articulatory defects of children were definitely
and significantly associated with maladjustment and
undesirable traits (determined by interviews and question
naires) of the parents. In completing his study, he
21~uintilla M. Anders, "A Study of the Personal and Social Adjustment of Children with Functional Articulatory Defects" (unpublished PhM thesis, University of Wisconsin, Madison, 1945), pp. 18-54.
22sister Mary Rose Powers, "Personality Traits of Junior High School Stutterers as Measured by the California Test of Personality" (unpublished Master's thesis, the University of Illinois, Urbana, 1944), pp. 45-62.
16
administered the California Test of Personality to a group
of speech defective children. The children's scores were
widely scattered for all three sections of the test and
his were not considered significant in showing maladjust-
ment among the children. Therefore, he concluded that
the speech defective children did not differ signifi-
cantly from test norms on the California Test of Personality. 23
C. Summary and Discussion
In final analysis of the preceding discussion, the
following conclusions may be formulated:
1. Articulatory defects are estimated to comprise
at least seventy per cent of the total cases
of defective speech.
2. Such defects may be considered to consist of
abnormal substitutions, distortions, inser-
tions, or omission of the speech sounds.
3. The causes of articulatory defects are discussed
in terms of organic abnormalities, motor
incoordinations, developmental retardation,
perceptual deficiencies, and emotional
instabilities.
23Kenneth S. Wood, "Parental Maladjustment and Functional Articulatory Defects in Children," Journal of Speech Disorders, VII, December, 1946, 4, pp. 255-275.
17
4. The majority of authors consider emotional
instability a causal factor in articulatory
defects, especially functional articulatory
defects.
5. Of the several research studies that are reported
with college students, the speech correction
groups were found to possess socially undesir-
able personality traits. They tend to be more
neurotic and less emotionally stable than
other college students having normal speech.
6. Of the three reported studies with elementary
school children, there is little evidence of
the possible influence of speech defects on
personality. In the limited number of cases
sampled, the speech defective group indicated
no definite tendency toward maladjustment.
The above data indicate a diversity of opinion about
the emotional instability of people with articulatory
speech defects. In college students, speech defects
indicate emotional instability; in elementary school
pupils, such a relationship has not yet been shown. There-
fore, a need for further investigation is warranted.
Before the conclusion can be accepted that articulatory
defects in elementary school children are not associated
Library l""l:,n,t:: : 1
, \.-lfaxhingt;:m CoJJlllrf > icn
, :; ".;1;':;;, ·,';: ;:J.shi'V'h"?'I'\
18
with emotional instability, more observation is necessary.
There is a need for statistical data that would:
1. Show the attitude of speech defective children
toward speech, and
2. Sample the personal and social adjustment of a
number of children with articulatory defects.
This analysis will attempt to further investigate
the problem of whether emotional instability is evident
in children with articulatory defects, and obtain evi
dence concerning the hypothesis that the speech defect
itself contributed to theemotional instability. If the
hypothesis is supported, speech training would apparently
be an effective instrument for resolving any mild or
more serious maladjustment.
CHAPTER III
STANDARDS FOR EVALUATION
This particular approach to an objective analysis
concerning the relationship of articulatory defects to
emotional instability involved (a) the selection of a
standardized personality inventory, (b) the construction
of a speech attitude scale, (c) the selection of a group
of children with articulatory defects and an equated
control group, (d) the administration of the tests to the
two groups, and (e) the recognition of the limitations
of the study.
A. The Standardized Personality Test
The first problem in this empirical study was the
selection of a standardized personality inventory. After
a survey of several inventories, the California Test of
Personality (CTP)--Primary Series, was chosen because of
the following distinctive features: (1) it is designed
to reveal the extent to which a group of pupils is adjusting
to the problems and conditions which confront them, (2) it
indicates how pupils feel about themselves (personal
adjustment) and how they function as social beings (social
adjustment), (3) it permits a comparison in terms of
inventory scores, the adjustment patterns and habits of
20
a specific group (i.e., speech defective children) with a
large representative group, (4) it is based upon a study
of over 1,000 adjustment patterns and responses to specific
situations which confront children of these ages, and (5)
it is graded, so that it may be used on groups ranging
from grade one through college.
In critical analysis of the CTP, Percival Symonds
commented, "This instrument would appear to be one of the
most carefully prepared questionnaires of this type. 1124
For more conclusive evidence of reliability in
definite terms, the 1953 manual of the CTP reports the
reliability coefficients (apparently internal consistency
coefficients) to be: Total Adjustment .88, Personal
Adjustment .83, and Social Adjustment .so. 25
In statistical analysis of the CTP, Eldon E. Jacob
sen reports the stability coefficients (with five to six
weeks' interval) to be: Total Adjustment, .69:.06 for the
+ first grade, and .77-.04 for the third grade; Personal
Adjustment, .52:.os for the first grade, and .73:.04 for
24Percival M. Symonds, (Professor of Education, Columbia University) in Oscar K. Buros, The Third Mental Measurements Yearbook (New Jersey: Mental Measurements Yearbook, 1941), p. 1214.
25Louis P. Thorpe, Willis W. Clark, and Ernest W. Tiegs, California Test of Personality--Primary Series: Manual (Los Angeles, California: California Test Bureau, 1953), p. 4.
21
the third grade; Social Adjustment, .64=.06 for the first
grade, and .75=.04 for the third grade. 26
Although some of these considerations prompted the
selection of the inventory, there are certain limitations
which are recognized in the use of any personality inven-
tory. First, one might ask whether questions which are
asked and answered as a part of a school requirement can
be expected to reveal underlying trends which may be
apparently not felt to exist in the personality. Secondly,
by asking pupils questions about themselves, one is securing
evidence of only one kind of adjustment, namely, the pupil's
own attitude toward himself. Thus, the questionnaire is
more limited in its applications than its name, 11 Test of
Personality,u would indicate.
But these criticisms would apply with equal force to
all personality inventories of this general type, for such
instruments should not be used for the basis of a program
of individual diagnosis and treatment without knowing more
of the developmental history and family background of the
pupil. This statement would appear to be in accordance
with the viewpoint of the authors of the CTP:
26Eldon E. Jacobsen, 11 Assessment of Adjustment in Children and Adolescents: Reliabilities and Relationships Concerning Common Group Tests and Ratings and Their Relationships to Judgments from Clinical Tests 11 (unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Washington, Seattle, 1955), p. 68.
22
Personality is not something separate and apart from ability or achievement but includes them; it refers rather to the manner and effectiveness with which the whole individual meets his personal and social problems, and indirectly the manner in which he impresses his fellows ••• Individual reactions to items are obtained, not primarily for the usefulness of total or section scores, but to detect the areas and specific types of tendencies to think, feel, and actl
7which reveal
undesirable individual adjustment.
In research where group average differences in
specific traits or social adjustment are being investi-
gated, the value of such inventories becomes more definite
in indicating general tendencies toward emotional instability
or a difference in attitude of a group.
B. The Speech Attitude Scale
Accepting the hypothesis that a speech defect can
give rise to adverse emotional reactions to speech, these
reactions would be evident, as appearing on a speech
attitude scale. The construction of this scale presented
a problem in that a measuring instrument was necessary
which would sample a number of speaking situations, use a
language suitable for children in the primary grades, avoid
stereotyped answers, be similar in form to the selected
standardized personality inventory, and be brief enough
to permit administration in a reasonable time.
27Thorpe, Clark, and Tiegs, .2£· cit., p. 2.
23
Suggestions for questions used in the Speech Attitude
Scale (SAS) were obtained from Franklin H. Knower's Speech
Attitude Scale28 and from William R. Tiffany's Speech
Attitude Scale for Stutterers. 29 However, the majority
of questions were formulated by the writer and sought to
sample as many of the child's speaking situations as
possible. Therefore, questions revealing his attitude
toward speech in the home, the school, and in the neighbor
hood and community were felt to be pertinent. From a
preliminary group of sixty questions taken from the
previously mentioned sources, twenty-two questions were
chosen for the final scale, given in Appendix A.
The questions were worded so as to require a YES
or NO answer, as was the case with the personality inven-
tory. Every effort was made to phrase the questions
clearly, concisely, and in a language intelligible to the
elementary school child.
The greatest difficulty encountered was phrasing
questions which would elicit the child's reaction to
28Franklin H. Knower, ".A Study of Speech Attitudes and Adjustments," Speech Monographs, V (1953), pp. 130-203.
29william R. Tiffany, "An Experimental Study of the Growth of Speech and Stuttering Attitudes in Children," (unpublished Master's thesis, the University of Washington, Seattle, 1947), pp. 82-85.
24
speech, rather than his attitude toward his parents or
the situations involved. Instead of asking, "Do other
people ever make fun of your speech?" or "Do you think
children should tell their parents about the things they
do?" the questions were worded, "Are you ever afraid that
other people make fun of your speech?" or Do you like to
tell your parents about the new things you do or see? 11
Thus, the SAS sought to determine the speech defective
child's reactions to speech in various situations since
it was felt those feelings could be the key to his intimate
personality status, as well as his possible improvement.
The scale was scored by counting the number of
undesirable responses and subtracting that number from
twenty-two, the total score.
Since the scale was designed by the writer to sample
a small segment of the population's attitude toward speech
situations, it was necessary to obtain an estimate of its
reliability. This was accomplished by administering the
scale twice to twenty-five youngsters in a Second-Third
grade room at the College Elementary School, with a week's
interval. For the first test, the mean was computed to
be 13.89, with a mean of 14.36 for the retest--a slight
rise in test scores. The reliability was established by
using the Product-Moment formula, and resulted in an r of
25
.536, with a standard error of :.14. This would indicate
a moderate degree of reliability, significant beyond the
one per cent level of confidence. The restricted sample
of students in the College Elementary School, who showed
largely favorable speech attitudes, probably resulted in
a lower reliability coefficient than might be found with
a wider sample. The approach used for establishing the
reliability of the scale may be examined in Appendix B.
C. The Subjects
The Speech Defective Qroup
The children used in this study were selected from
grades one through three of the Auburn School District, a
medium class, urban area of King County, Washington. The
speech defective children had been screened from the Auburn
Schools by the classroom teachers and reported to the speech
therapist as articulatory cases.
Each teacher gave an opinion as to the severity of
the defect and an independent judgment was made by the
writer. The writer's judgment was made after listening
to a sample of the child's speech in a brief conversation
and making a phonetic inventory before the tests (this
situation is standard in part of the diagnosis for all
reported articulation cases, and was not devised to
26
accommodate only this particular study). The articulation
defects were diagnosed as either mild, moderate, or severe.
To standardize the teachers' opinions, the following
categories were designed for their use:
1. A mild defect was considered one which would be
noticed by an untrained observer, but not considered
offensive. Slight articulation defects would not involve
more than two sounds.
2. A moderate defect refers to the type of speech
which can readily be recognized by a person as deviating
considerably from accepted speech. The sounds and omis
sions would be serious enough to mark the speech as
unquestionably defective. Any number of sounds would be
affected.
3. A severe defect is one which definitely inter
feres with communication. Such defects may have an organic
or functional basis, but preclude, to some degree, success
ful social adjustment. Numerous sounds, so poorly pro
nounced that recognition is almost impossible, are char
acteristic of a severe speech defect.
Where the diagnosis made by the investigator and
the teachers differed, the estimate made by the teacher
was adopted on the assumption that the teacher was better
able to compare the subject's speech with that of other
27
classroom children. However, arguments against this
procedure could easily be made, for the teacher, through
longer association with the child, might become accustomed
to the particular defect and thus give a biased judgment.
The therapist's judgment, being more objective, could
easily be more valid. Also, a diversity of opinion
between the speech therapist and the classroom teachers
as to the severity of the defect could be explained on the
basis of a difference in criteria used in judgment. Several
cases which were judged as moderate by the teachers were
estimated as mild defects by the writer. The difference
is logically explained by the fact that the testing and
interviewing were completed some months after the teachers'
judgments were made. Thus, the child with a moderate
defect may have benefitted by the therapy to a sufficient
extent as to be diagnosed as mild. This difference is
further substantiated by the fact that a few of the mild
cases were considered sufficiently rehabilitated to attend
speech classes only once a week at the time of testing.
The information compiled for each case included a
list of factors, as outlined in Appendix C. Since
intelligence scores were available only on the second
and third grade subjects, an estimate of the intelligence
of the first grade subjects was made by the classroom
teacher of each subject. Information which regarded the
home situation of each subject was gained during the
writer's conference with the mothers of the subjects.
Also, at this time, an explanation of the purposes for
this particular study was made to the parent, and verbal
parental consent was given for the participation of each
subject in the program.
The Controls
28
The control group was selected by a parallel-group
technique (that is, both groups were as nearly equivalent
as possible, except for the one variable, the speech
deficiency). A mimeographed brief for grades one, two,
and three, describing each speech defective subject by
the factors listed in Appendix C was prepared and distri
buted to each classroom teacher in the respective grades
in the Auburn district. Each teacher was then asked to
select a child, or children, from her class that most
nearly matched any of the subjects in the experimental
group on the basis of the characteristics outlined in
Appendix C.
Some difficulty was expressed by a few of the
teachers in the primary grades, who considered some
experimental cases unique ones an.dfelt that the equivalent
29
was only to be found in a lower grade. In each case where
such difficulties occurred, a control match was found in
another classroom, or another school, if necessary, but
the criteria was unaltered.
The two groups may be compared in Tables 1, 2, 3,
and 4.
Table 1 indicates the distribution of number in
both groups. Twelve of the speech defective group are
from grade one, twelve are from grade two, and twelve
are from grade three, giving a total of thirty-six experi
mental cases. The same number, with the same ratio of
students from each grade, were included in the control
group.
Table 2 gives a comparison of the two groups,
according to sex and grade. In grades one and three,
the number of males was dominant, with nine from the
first, and eight from the second. However, this ratio
was reversed in the second grade, and there were seven
girls, with only five boys.
Table 3 shows a comparison of the available intel
ligence quotient scores for both groups. Of the speech
defective group, only thirty-six per cent of the scores
were available, and those showed a mean intelligence
quotient of 98.8. Only twenty-nine per cent of the scores
were available for the control group, with those showing
30
a mean intelligence quotient of 101.6.
Table 4 shows a comparison of the classroom teachers'
and the writer's estimates as to the severity of the speech
defect for the experimental group. In grade one, the
majority of the cases were judged severe by the teachers,
but the writer judged only sixteen per cent of the grade
one subjects to be severe articulation cases.
In grade two, the teachers estimated that half of
the cases were mild, and half were moderate articulation
cases, but the writer judged that seventy-five per cent
of the cases were mild articulation problems, and only
twenty-five per cent as being moderate in degree of
severity.
In grade three, the teachers' estimates were fairly
even distributed, but the writer rated sixty-six per
cent of the experimental cases to be mild articulation
problems, with only twenty-six per cent and eight per
cent in the moderate and severe categories, respectively.
TABLE 1
A COMPARISON OF THE GRADE LEVELS OF THE SPEECH
DEFECTIVE GROUP AND THE CONTROL GROUP
Grade Defects Controls
I
II
III
Totals
12
12
12
36
12
12
12
36
31
TABLE 2
A COMPARISON OF THE SPEECH DEFECTIVE GROUP AND
THE CONTROL GROUP ACCORDING TO SEX AND GRADE
Grade
I Defects Controls
II Defects Controls
III Defects Controls
Total Defects Total Controls
Male
9 9
(75%)
5 5
(42%)
8 8
(67%)
22 22
(61%)
Female
3 3
(25%)
7 7
(58%)
4 4
(33%)
14 14
(39%)
32
TABLE 3
A COMPARISON OF AVAILABLE INTELLIGENCE QUOTIENT
SCORES ON THE SPEECH DEFECTIVE GROUP
AND CONTROL GROUP
Group Per Cent of Scores Available
Defects 36
Controls 29
33
Mean
I.Q.
98.8
101.6
TABLE 4
A cor1PARISON OF CLASSROOM TEACHERS' AND wRITER' s
ESTIMATE OF THE SEVERITY OF THE SPEECH DEFECT
Group Classroom Teachers' writer's Estimate Estimate
Mild Moderate Severe Mild Moderate
Grade I Defects 1 4 7 5 5
(8%) (33%) (59%) (42) (42%)
Grade II Defects 6 6 0 9 3
(50%) (50%) (0%) (75%) (25%)
Grade III Defects 4 5 3 8 3
(33%) (42%) (25%) (66%) (26%)
·I'otals 11 15 10 22 11 (30%) (42%) (28%) (62%) (31%)
34
Severe
2 (16%)
0 (0%)
1 (8%)
3 (7%)
From the preceding discussion and the Tables, the
following information may be summarized about the groups
tested:
1. An equal distribution of number was found in
each grade.
2. Sixty-one per cent of the cases tested were
boys.
3. The control group had a slightly higher mean
intelligence quotient than the speech defec
tive group. However, the limited number of
test scores available makes any assumption
35
as to the differences in intelligence between
the two groups insignificant.
4. Forty-two per cent of the experimental group
were considered, by the teachers, to have
moderate speech defects, but the writer
ranked sixty-two per cent of the experimental
group as being mild speech defectives.
Using the matching criteria (as found in Appendix
C) the groups were equated as closely as possible. This
could eliminate the possibility that any differences in
self-ratings between the two groups might arise as factors
of non-equation.
36
D. The Administration of the Tests
Since the subjects ranged in grade one through three,
it was possible to use one form (AA) of the CTP to obtain
self-estimates on personality for each subject.
The SAS was given first in every case. With the
first grade students who did not have sufficient reading
vocabulary to follow the printed questions, it was nec
essary to read the questions aloud to each pupil and in
some cases where reading skills were not as well developed
as necessary, the responses of the pupils were recorded
by the investigator. To keep all the factors in the
administration of the test as constant as possible, the
writer read the test questions to all older groups, but
permitted them to encircle their own answers. The first
grade students were tested individually, or in groups of
two, with a short recess between sections one and two of
the personality inventory. They were seated with their
backs to each other at small tables and used markers to
follow the questions in their booklets. For the second
and third grades, where the pupils were able to follow
the questions when read aloud, the test was read clearly
and slowly to groups ranging from four to eight. In these
cases, each child encircled his own answers.
Rapport was established first, by explaining to each
37
child or group of children that they had been selected
as one of seventy-two boys and girls to be called from
class work to help adults determine how children generally
feel about speech and other matters pertaining to speech
in the home and school. Secondly, rapport was established
by the writer's further explanations that grown-ups often
forget how they felt about speech when they were in grade
school, and it was hoped that the children felt their
honest opinions about speech would enable adults to do a
better job of helping those who had more difficulty with
speech than they did. Thirdly, the fact was stressed
that there were no correct answers to the questions, and
the reason they were asked was that adults agreed they did
not know the answer, and needed a 11 second grader's good
opinion. 11 And lastly, it was emphasized that their
thoughtful, honest answers to the questions on the tests
would be used to help other boys and girls to speak
effectively and clearly.
By putting two sample questions on the board as
examples (i.e., "Do you have a dog at home?" and "Did you
walk all the way to school this morning?") and encircling
a sample YES or NO, the examiner illustrated that there
were no right or wrong answers to the questions, because
some children would answer YES, and others NO. Thus,
since there were no right or wrong answers, they were
merely to answer as honestly as possible as to how they
felt about the matter expressed in each question.
38
The questions were read so as not to betray by
inflection or expression the "right" answer. \-!here doubt
or hesitancy was evident, the examiner asked the child to
think how he felt or what he did about a situation most
of the time, and then encircle that answer.
The administration of the SAS first proved advanta
geous because the questions in the test asked for opinions
about speech and speaking situations and confirmed the
statements made in the establishment of rapport. As the
method of answering was similar in the inventory that
followed (the CTP), further explanation was unnecessary;
the questions appeared to be answered in a serious,
thoughtful manner.
E. The Limitations
There are certain limitations in this particular
study that should be noted.
The limited number of both experimental and control
cases prevented as adequate a statistical sampling of
factors in the criteria for matching as might be desired.
The limited number of experimental cases did not
yield a normal sampling as to severity of defect.
Because of the limited number of control cases,
there were some limitations of the factors involved in
the matching criteria.
A test of reliability for the SAS would have been
more meaningful, had it been administered to both groups
involved in this study.
Areas of exploration that could have been included
in the matching criteria:
A. Intelligence ratings of parents and siblings.
B. Personality ratings of parents and siblings.
39
This chapter has presented the standards for evalua
tion, and has discussed the reliabilities for the two
test instruments that were used. The results of the
statistical analysis of this study are discussed in the
following chapter.
CHAPTER IV
EVALUATION AND RESULTS
This particular problem involves an attempt to test
the hypothesis that emotional instability, as measured by
the California Test of Personality (CTP), is evident in
children with articulatory defects. Such a finding would
show that the speech defect contributes to the emotional
instability or that emotional instability is a relevant
antecedent of articulatory disorders.
To resolve the problem, certain methods of evalua
tion were employed: (1) selection of a standardized
personality inventory, (2) the construction of a speech
attitude scale, (3) the selection of a group of children
with articulatory defects and an equated control group,
the articulation defect being the variable under control,
with personality as the factor to be measured (in this
case serving as the dependent variable), (4) the admin
istration of the tests to the two groups, and (5) the
evaluation of the results.
A comparison of the experimental and control groups
used in this study was made by analyzing the scores on
(A) the CTP and (B) the Speech Attitude Scale (SAS). In
evaluating the data on the SAS, a correlation coefficient
was calculated to obtain an estimate of its reliability.
41
A. The California Test of Personality
In comparing the two groups on the CTP, the scores
on personal adjustment, social adjustment, and total
adjustment were used. The personal adjustment score was
obtained from six sub-tests containing questions purporting
to ascertain the child's self-reliance, sense of personal
worth, sense of personal freedom, feeling of belonging,
withdrawing tendencies, and nervous symptoms. The social
adjustment score was determined from questions purporting
to assess the student's social standards, social skills,
anti-social tendencies, family relations, school relations,
and community relations. By adding the personal adjustment
score and the social adjustment score, the total adjustment
of each child was calculated.
To establish the statistical significance of the mean
difference between the two groups, t-tests were computed.
As shown in the following table, the t-test results
indicate a high level of significance for all areas.
From an examination of the data presented in Table 5,
a comparison of the two groups may be made to determine
the relative emotional stability of the speech defective
child and the child with no articulatory disorder.
Inspection of mean scores, and the mean difference of the
scores, and level of confidence shows that the two groups
42
are significantly different in personal adjustment, social
adjustment, and total adjustment. In every section of
the test, the speech normal children showed a higher group
mean. For example, finding the significance to be beyond
the one per cent level of confidence would suggest, if
the experiment were replicated, that ninety-nine times
out of one hundred we would expect the mean of the speech
normal group to be higher than the mean for the speech
defective group.
TABLE 5
A COMPAHISON OF MEAN SCORES ON CALIFORNIA TEST OF PERSONALITY--PRIMARY SERIES
FOR CHILDREN WITH ARTICULATION DISORDERS AND SPEECH-NORMAL CHILDREN
AREAS OF Group Mean Mean Std. error Significance MEASUREMENT N Raw Scores Diff. of mean D.F. t Level
difference
Personal Adjustment 6.64 1.05 35 6.32 Beyond 1%
Experimentals 36 27.61
Controls 36 34.25
Social Adjustment 3.42 1.35 35 2.35 Beyond 2%
Experimentals 36 35.19
Controls 36 38.61
Total Scores 10.05 1.93 35 5.21 Beyond 1%
Experimentals 36 62.81
Controls 36 72.86
~ \.N
44
As a group, speech defective children are character-
istically significantly less emotionally stable, as
determined b~ the CTP.
1. Personal Adjustment
On the personal adjustment section of the CTP, the
speech normal group show a mean of 34.25, which is higher
than the speech defective group's average of 27.61. The
standard deviations of !7.28 for the speech defectives and
!6.63 for the controls indicate that the scores of both
groups on personal adjustment are similarly distributed.
The mean difference between the two groups is 6.64. The
obtained value of t, 6.32, exceeded the one per cent level
of significance.
2. Social Adjustment
The scores on social adjustment of the two groups
show the same trend as the total and personal adjustment
scores. The control group children in the primary grades,
with mean scores of 38.61 and a standard deviation of
!6.08, may have a few more social skills and fewer anti-
social tendencies. As such, the responses suggest that
the majority of them probably maintain better family,
school, and community relations than the children with
articulatory defects who have a mean score of 35.19 with
45
+ a standard deviation of -6.93. Again, the two distri-
butions are similar. The mean difference between the two
groups is 3.42. With thirty-five degrees of freedom,
t resulted in a figure of 2.35, one that is beyond the two
per cent level of significance.
3. Total Adjustment
Total adjustment scores suggest that the speech
defective group with a mean of 62.81 SD !12.57 are not as
+ emotionally stable as the controls with 72.86 SD -8.37.
However, the standard deviation of the control group at
!s.37 indicates less variability within the group than
the speech defective group with!12.57. The speech defec-
tives' scores are less clustered around the mean--being
much more diversified than the control groups' scores. A
mean difference between the two groups was computed to
be 10.05 and the t-test resulted in a figure of 5.21.
This revealed that the significance of the obtained
differences was beyond the one per cent level of confidence.
On the basis of these results, it is possible to
reject the null hypothesis (that there is no difference
between the means of the two groups) as improbable, and
regard the obtained differences in the test results as
being truly representative of two different populations,
and not occurring as chance variation from the selection
of samples. It can be assumed with considerable confi
dence that children with speech disorders, as a group,
manifest less adequate self-perceptions of personality
than children without speech disorders.
46
Complete data, showing the distributions of the raw
scores, means, and standard deviations for both groups
on the CTP are shown in Appendix E.
B. The Speech Attitude Scale
In comparing the two groups on the SAS, each test
was scored by counting the number of undesirable responses,
from a speech therapist's standpoint, and subtracting that
number from twenty-two, the total score.
In order to estimate the reliability of the scale,
a correlation coefficient was calculated. This was
accomplished by administering the scale twice (one week
interval) to a Second-Third grade room at the College
Elementary School, then computing a Product-Moment Cor
relation Coefficient between the two tests. The stability
coefficient was found to be .536, with a standard error
of ~.14, giving the scale a moderate degree of reliability,
significant beyond the one per cent level of confidence.
The individual scores used for the Product-Moment Cor
relation of the scale may be examined in Appendix B.
47
A t-test of significance was computed for the mean
difference between scores on the SAS. An example of the
calculation of t is included in Appendix D. As shown in
Table 6, a mean for the speech defectives on the SAS
proved to be 9.28 SD ±2.73, with the mean for the controls
being 12.36 SD ±2.60, giving a mean difference between
the two groups of 3.08, with a t of 5.22. This shows
the difference to be significant at the one per cent level
of confidence. This suggests that there is only one chance
in one hundred that the difference is due to chance
factors.
Inspection of the data shows that there is a definite
difference between the two groups in attitude toward speech,
as measured by the SAS. The control group tends to have
a less negative (more favorable) attitude toward situa
tions involving speech. However, the scores for the
control group tend to be more diversified. Complete
data, showing the distributions of the raw scores, the
means, and the standard deviations for both groups on the
SAS are shown in Appendix F.
AREA OF MEASUREMENT
TABLE 6
A COMPARISON OF MEAN SCORES ON SPEECH ATTITUDE SCALE
FOR CHILDREN WITH ARTICULATION DISORDERS AND SPEECH-NORMAL CHILDREN
N Group Mean Raw Scores
Mean Diff.
Std. error of
mean diff.
Speech Attitude Scale 3.08 • 59
Experimentals
Controls
36
36
9.28
12.36
D.F.
35
Significance t Level
5.22 Beyond 1%
+:OJ
.An item-by-item analysis of the SAS, as given in
Table 7, provides further comparison of the two groups
and throws further light on the speech defective child's
attitude toward speech. Scoring was accomplished by
designating items "incorrect" which show "poor speech
attitudes" insofar as speech therapists are concerned.
49
It should be noted that on seven questions, the
speech defective children show a more definite negative
attitude toward speech than the control group. On ques
tion 1, eighty-three per cent of the speech defective
children indicate that their fathers do not let them
talk as much as they would like at home, but only sixty
per cent of the speech normal children indicated the same
answer. In question 6, forty-one per cent of the speech
defectives answered NO to the question, nno your )arents
think that you speak well'?" compared to sixteen per cent
of the controls. The answers on these two questions
tend to suggest a reaction on the part of the speech
defective group to parental attitudes regarding speech.
On the other questions--numbers 13, 14 and 15-
the speech defective group indicated more negative atti
tudes toward speech than the control group.
The most striking difference between groups appears
in the answers to question 20, where sixty-five per cent
TABLE 7
A COMPARISON OF THE TWO GROUPS ON THE NUMBER OF "POOR SPEECH ATTITUDE 11 ANSWERS ON THI£ SPEECH ATTITUDE SCALE
Per Cent of Defects Questions with Desirable Attitude Answer Answering in terms
of Poor Speech Attitude
1. Does your father let you talk as much as you like at home? (YES)
2. Does your mother let you talk as much as you like at home? (Yes)
3. Do your parents often correct you at home when you speak? (NO)
If YES, does it bother you to have them correct you? (NO)
4. Do your parents often correct your speech in front of others? (NO)
If YES, does it bother you to have them correct your speech in front of others? (NO)
5. Do you have to be careful how you speak for fear you will be corrected? (NO)
83 (NO)
69 (NO)
81 (YES)
35 (YES)
50 (YES)
45 (YES)
74 (YES)
Per Cent of-~Coiitrois Answering in terms of Poor Speech Attitude
60
50
70
20
35
30
65
(NO)
(NO)
(YES)
(YES)
(YES)
(YES)
(YES)
\Jl 0
TABLE 7 (Continued)
Questions with Desirable Attitude Answer Per Cent of Defects Answering in terms of Poor Speech Attitude
6. Do your parents think that you speak well? (YES) 41
7. Are you ever afraid that other people will make fun of your speech? (NO) 20
8. Would you like to be allowed to ask your parents more questions about things? (NO) 60
9. Do you like to tell your parents about the new things you've done or seen? (YES) 10
10. Do you like to tell the things you have done or seen in your class? (YES) 20
11. Do you like to read aloud to the class? (YES) 30
12. Do you think other people in your class speak better than you do? (NO)
13. Do others like to listen to you when you tell about the things that happen to you? (Y.ES)
80
35
(NO)
(YES)
(YES)
(NO)
(NO)
(NO)
(YES)
(NO)
Per Cent of Controls Answering in terms of Poor Speech Attitude
16 (NO)
14 (YES)
59 (YES)
10 (NO)
16 (NO)
24 (NO)
65 (YES)
11 (NO)
\J1 I-'
TABLE 7 (Continued)
Questions with Desirable Attitude Answer Per Cent of Defects Answering in terms of Poor Speech Attitude
14. Do you enjoy talking to the older children? (YES) 38
15. Is it hard for you to talk to a group of children who are not your good friends? (NO) 75
16. Do you worry about talking to grownups or strangers because of your speech? (NO) 30
17. Do you think that pretending or talking to make-believe playmates is more fun than talking to your friends? (NO) 16
18. Do you think that your parents like to have you talk when company is present? (YES) 84
19. Do you think we should make fun of the people who do not speak well on the radio, or in the movies, or TV? (NO) 6
20. Do you ever feel ashamed of yourself because of your speech? (NO) 65
(NO)
(YES)
(YES)
(YES)
(NO)
(YES)
(YES)
Per Cent of Controls Answering in terms of roor Speech Attitude
10 (NO)
52 (YES)
12 (YES)
11 (YES)
80 (NO)
0 (YES)
20 (YES)
\Jl I\)
53
of the speech defective group indicated that they have
felt ashamed of themselves because of their speech, while
only twenty per cent of the control group felt the same
way. The answers of the speech defective groups suggest
an awareness of the speech defects.
The item-by-item analysis of the SAS substantiates
the earlier findings that the two groups do differ in
their reactions to speech, with the speech defective
group showing a consistently higher percentage of "poor
speech attitude" answers than the control group.
In analysis of the questions on the SAS, it seems
that the wording of these questions may have been such
that they called for an attitude toward parental discipline
rather than toward speech. That a great many fathers do
not let their children talk as much as they like in the
home, that many parents often correct the child's speech,
that some parents feel children ask too many questions,
and that most parents feel children are not to take too
active a part in conversation with company--all can
readily be considered a part of the home discipline. How
much such discipline directly or indirectly affects the
child's speech is beyond the scope of this paper.
The results as presented, have shown that the con
trol group consistently scored a higher mean in all
54
sections of the OTP, in personal adjustment, social adjust
ment, and in total scores.
The results have also shown that the control group
show a higher mean than the experimental group on the SAS.
The results have further shown that children with
articulatory defects are not as well adjusted as children
without speech defects (as indicated by the OTP), both in
personal and social adjustments, and in total adjustments.
In addition, the results have shown that children
with articulation defects have a less positive attitude
toward speech than do the children without speech defects.
These differences were tested for significance and
suggest the improbability of the difference being due to
chance selection of the sample, but rather actual differ
ences in emotional adjustment and attitude toward speech.
CHAPTER V
SU111"1ARY
The purpose of this study was to determine whether
a group of children with articulatory defects differed
significantly in emotional stability from a control group
when measured by a standardized personality inventory
designed to reveal the personal and social adjustment and
a speech attitude scale devised to detect reactions to
speech situations. To accomplish this, an experimental
group of thirty-six speech defective children and a control
group of thirty-six speech normal children were selected
from the primary grades, twelve in each group from each
grade. The groups were matched according to all avail
able relevant factors (listed in Appendix C). Scores
were obtained for each child in the two groups on (1)
personal adjustment, (2) social adjustment, and (3) total
adjustment, taken from the California Test of Personality
(CTP), and (4) the Speech Attitude Scale (SAS), constructed
by the researcher.
From the tabulation of data, the following conclu
sions are justifiable and answer the questions posed in
the opening chapter:
1. Children with articulatory defects in the primary
grades do differ significantly in personal
adjustment, social adjustment, and total
adjustment in personality from a matched
control group when measured by the CTP.
56
2. The children with articulatory defects tend to
have a less positive attitude toward speech
than a control group of speech normal children,
when measured on the SAS.
From the above conclusions of this study, the
following observations are made as highly probable:
1. Emotional instability, as measured by the CTP,
can be substantiated as a causal factor in
articulatory defects, or the possibility exists
that a speech defect may be a relevant ante
cedent of emotional instability.
2. The speech defect can be a causal factor in
the difference of attitude toward speech, or
even more important, from a preventative
standpoint, speech attitude seems to be a
relevant antecedent of the defect.
Before such observations are accepted as fact,
however, further research is needed. First, it is felt
that a more effective speech attitude scale could be
designed through further experimentation. Such an
57
instrument could make it possible to determine early, a
difference in attitude toward speech and thus make speech
correction more effective in absolving such difficulties.
Secondly, further research with children diagnosed as
having severe or moderate defects is needed to substan-
tiate the relationship between articulatory defects and
emotional stability. This small sampling contained only
three cases diagnosed as severe in the experimental group
of the present study. More severe cases in the experi-
mental group, rather than those diagnosed with less
severity would provide greater definitiveness. Also, it
would be desirable to have investigations on the diversity
of judgments by therapists and teachers as to the severity
of the defect. Thirdly, research which will test a
sufficiently large number of children in each grade,
especially the older elementary school children, is needed
to determine the possible growth of any difference in
attitudes toward both speech and emotional stability.
And finally, experimentation with two groups of children
with articulatory defects--one group having speech cor
rection and the other not--would ascertain the part that
speech rehabilitation might take in alleviating the less
favorable attitudes toward speech and emotional stability.
.x.HcIVHDOI'IS:I 9:
BIBLIOGRAPHY
A. BOOKS
Backus, Ollie L. Speech in Education, ! Guide for the Classroom Teacher. New York: Longmans Green and Co., 1953.
Bender, James F., and Victor M. Kleinfield. Principles and Practices of Speech Correction. New York: Pitman Publishing Co., 1938.
Berry, Mildred F., and Jon Eisenson. The Defective in Speech. New York: F. S. Crofts and Co., 1955·
Stinchfield, Sara M. Speech Disorders: StudJ of Various Defects of Speech. Brace and Co., 1953.
! Psychological New York: Harcourt,
Symonds, Percival M., in 0. K. Buros. The Third Mental Measurements Yearbook, Mental Measur"8Ili'ents Yearbook, New Jersey, 1941.
west, Robert, Louis Kennedy, and Anna Carr. The Rehabilitation of Speech, ~ Textbook of Diagnostic and Corrective Procedures. Rev. Ed. New York: Harper and Bros., 1947.
Van Riper, Charles. Speech Correction: Principles and Methods. New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1947.
white House Conference on Child Health and Protection. Special Education, Report of Committee on Special Classes. New York: D. Appleton-Century Co., 1932.
B. PERIODICALS
Knower, Franklin H. "A Study of Speech Attitudes and Adjustments," Sueech Monographs, V (1953), pp. 130-203.
Moore, W. E. "Personality Traits and Voice Quality Deficiencies," Journal of Speech Disorders, 4 (March, 1949), pp. 33-36.
60
Templin, M. A. 11 A Study of Aggressiveness in Normal and Defective Speaking College Students, 11 Journal of Speech Disorders, March, 1948, pp. 43-49.
Wood, Kenneth Scott. "Parental Maladju,stment and Functional Articulatory Defects in Children, 11 Journal of S~eech Disorders, 7, No. 4 (December, 1946), pp. 255-2 5.
C. PERSONALITY INVENTORIES
Bernreuter, R. G. Personality Inventory. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 1931.
Thorpe, Louis P., Willis W. Clark, and Ernest W. Tiegs. California Tes! of Personality--Primari and ElementarJ Series. Los Angeles, California: California Test Bureau, 1953.
Thurstone, L. L., and T. G. Thurstone. Personality Schedule. Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago Press, 1929.
D. UNPUBLISHED MATERIALS
Anders, Quintilla Morgan. 11 A Study of Personal and Social Adjustment of Children with Functional Articulatory Defects. 11 Unpublished Phll Thesis, The University of Wisconsin, Madison, 1945.
Jacobsen, Eldon E. 11 Assessment of Adjustment in Children and Adolescents: Reliabilities and Relationships Concerning Common Group Tests and Ratings and Their Relationships to Judgments from Clinical Tests." Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Washington, Seattle, 1955.
Powers, Sister ivrary Bose. "Personality Traits of Junior High School Stutterers as Measured by the California Test of Personality." Unpublished MA thesis, University of Illinois, Urbana, 1944.
Roe, Vivian Irene. "The Effects of Maturation Upon Defective Articulation in Elementary Grades." Unpublished MA thesis, University of Indiana, Bloomington, 1940.
61
Tiffany, William R. "An Experimental Study of the Growth of Speech and Stuttering Attitudes in Children." Unpublished MA thesis, University of Washington, Seattle, 1947.
XIITNJJdcIV
APPENDIX A
SPEECH ATTITUDE SCALE
Instructions to pupils: After each of the following questions mark a circle around the YES or NO. The answers are not right or wrong, but show how you feel about speech.
1. Does your father let you talk as much as you like at home?
2. Does your mother let you talk as much as you like at home?
3. Do your parents often correct you at home when you speak?
If YES, does it bother you to have them correct you?
4. Do your parents often correct your speech in front of others?
If YES, does it bother you to have them correct your speech in front of others?
5. Do you have to be careful about how you speak for fear you will be corrected?
6. Do your parents think that you speak well?
7. Are you ever afraid that other people make fun of your speech?
8. Would you like to be allowed to ask your parents more questions about things?
9. Do you like to tell your parents about the new things you have done or seen?
10. Do you like to tell the things you have done or seen to your class?
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
NO
YE$ NO
YES NO
YES NO
us NO
YES NO
YES NO
11. Do you like to read aloud to the class?
12. Do you think other people in your class speak better than you do?
13. Do others like to listen to you when you tell about the things that happen to you?
14. Do you enjoy talking to the older children?
15. Is it hard for you to ta~k to a group of children who are not your good friends?
16. Do you worry about talking to grownups or strangers because of your speech?
17. Do you think that pretending or talking to make-believe playmates is more fun than talking to your friends?
18. Do you think that your parents like to have you talk when company is present?
19. Do you think we should make fun of the people who do not speak well on the radio, or in the movies, or TV?
20. Do you ever feel ashamed of yourself because of your speech?
64
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
Y}i;S NO
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
YES NO
65
APPENDIX B
SAMPLE DATA USED IN COMPUTING A STABILITY COEFFICIENT FOR THE SPEECH ATTITUDE SCALE
Test Retest x2 y2 x y XY
19 20 361 400 380 17 18 289 324 306 16 15 256 225 240 15 15 225 225 225 15 12 225 144 180 15 13 225 166 215 15 17 225 289 255 15 12 225 144 180 14 16 296 256 224 14 13 196 166 182 14 12 196 144 156 14 17 196 289 238 14 18 196 324 252 14 14 196 196 196 14 11 196 121 154 14 15 196 225 210 13 13 166 166 166 13 15 166 225 215 13 12 166 144 156 12 16 144 256 192 12 16 144 256 192 12 11 144 121 132 12 11 144 121 132 10 10 100 100 100 10 12 100 144 120
M 13.84 f1 14.36
1 week's interval
APPENDIX C
MATCHING CRITERIA FOR PARALLEL-GROUP TECHNIQUE
I. School grade
II. Sex
III. Race
IV. Chronological age
v. Retention
VI. Records of
A. Achievement B. Abilities
VII. Physical Rating
A. Size B. General Physical Condition C. Handicaps D. Attitude toward
1. Health habits 2. Personal appearance
VIII. Frequency of absences for previous school year
IX. Status of child in home
A. Adoption/Foster home B. Number of siblings C. Ages of siblings D. Adopted/half/step sisters/brothers E. Ordinal position
X. Parental Background
A. Cultural B. Educational C. Age group D. Health status
67
E. Occupation
1. Father 2. Mother
a. Full time b. Part time
F. Marital status
1. Both parents living 2. Previous divorce
XI. Home Status
A. Socio-economic group B. Stability C. Place of residence
1. City 2. Country
D. Type of residence
1. Single unit 2. Multiple unit 3. Project area
XII. Parental attitude toward
A. Child B. School
68
APPENDIX D
SAMPLE DATA FOR COMPUTING A t-TEST OF SIGNIFICANCE BETWEEN MATCHED PAIRS OF CHILDREN WITH ARTICULATION DISORDERS
AND SPEECH NORMAL CHILDREN ON THE SPEECH ATTITUDE SCALE
Ex12er. Cont. D d d2 10 5 5 -1.92 3 10 9 1 2.08 4 11 9 2 1.08 1 10 8 2 1.08 1 11 10 1 2.08 4 14 12 2 1.08 1 13 1 12 -8.92 80 13 10 3 .08 0 11 12 -1 4.08 17 12 12 0 3.08 9
9 6 3 .08 0 11 14 -3 6.08 37 15 8 7 -3.92 15 13 9 4 - .92 0 15 10 5 -1.92 3 11 13 -2 5.08 26 17 10 7 -3.92 15 11 10 1 2.08 4 15 7 8 -4.92 24 15 13 2 1.08 1 17 10 7 -3.92 15 12 13 -1 4.08 17
8 6 2 1.08 1 15 7 8 -4.92 24 17 9 8 -4.92 24 11 12 -1 4.08 17
7 9 -2 5.08 26 11 9 2 1.08 1 13 11 2 1.08 1 14 13 1 2.08 4 14 5 9 -5.92 35
9 9 0 3.08 9 9 7 2 1.08 1
16 9 7 -3.92 15 12 9 3 .08 0 13 8 2 -1.92
442 234 111 438
od + om + t 5.22 -3.49 d -.59
69
APPENDIX E COMPARATIVE RAW SCORES OF CHILDREN
WITH ARTICULATION DISORDERS AND SPEECH NORMAL CHILDREN FOR CALIFORNIA TEST OF PERSONALITY PRil"IARY SERIES (AA)--ALL SECTIONS
Personal Adjustment Social Adjustment Total Scores Ex:12er. Cont. Ex12er. Cont. Ex12er. Cont.
25 29 34 32 59 61 17 39 31 44 48 83 23 31 30 28 53 59 31 32 41 44 72 76 22 36 31 24 53 60 34 31 28 40 62 71 25 22 39 35 64 57 37 38 35 46 72 84 31 35 24 23 55 58 26 29 32 34 58 63 28 28 32 29 60 57 15 21 19 34 34 55 28 32 36 41 64 73 30 34 32 40 62 74 31 37 46 38 77 75 32 36 39 43 71 79 27 37 34 39 61 76 32 37 39 46 71 83 31 39 45 40 76 79 19 37 31 45 50 82 32 38 41 41 73 79 17 38 28 42 45 80 28 28 32 32 60 60 34 34 44 43 78 77 30 37 43 42 73 79 35 40 41 37 76 77 18 31 28 44 46 75 16 29 29 36 45 65 35 35 45 42 80 77 40 44 45 44 85 88 19 35 32 45 51 80 34 40 39 36 73 76 18 34 22 37 40 71 30 39 39 36 69 75 31 37 44 47 75 84 23 34 27 41 70 22
N 36 36 36 36 36 36 M ~7.61 ?4.25 45.19 ?8.61 +62.81 ~2.86 0 -6.62 -z.28 -6.93 -6.08 -12.57 -s.22
70
APPENDIX F
COMPARATIVE SCORES OF CHILDREN WITH ARTICULATION DISORDERS AND SPEECH NORMAL CHILDREN FOR
THE SPEECH ATTITUDE SCALE
Ex12erimentals Controls 5 10 9 10 9 11 8 10
10 11 12 14
1 13 10 13 12 11 12 12
6 9 14 :bl
8 15 9 13
10 15 13 11 10 17 10 11
7 15 13 15 10 17 13 12
6 8 7 15 9 17
12 11 9 7 9 11
11 13 13 14
5 14 9 9 7 9 9 16 9 12 8 1
N 36 36 l'1 +9.28 i2.36 0 -2.73 -2.60